Republican presidential candidate and Texas Rep. Ron Paul issued a sharply-worded statement in reaction to the detention of his son, Kentucky Sen. Rand Paul, by Transportation Security Administration agents in Nashville on Monday.

&#8220;The police state in this country is growing out of control,&#8221; Paul wrote in a statement provided to The Daily Caller. &#8220;One of the ultimate embodiments of this is the TSA that gropes and grabs our kids and our seniors and does nothing to keep us safe.&#8221;

Paul has been a vocal critic of the TSA, and is the sponsor of the &#8220;American Traveler Dignity Act,&#8221; which would remove TSA agents&#8217; immunity from prosecution for implementing invasive pat-down procedures.

In Paul&#8217;s Monday statement, he noted, &#8220;my &#8216;Restore America Plan,&#8217; in additional to cutting $1 trillion dollars in one year, eliminates the TSA.&#8221;

Comment: It amazes me people are so asleep they believe that TSA is here to protect us.
Its for police state, See Rockefeller even said before 911 that the War on Terror would be a created fraud that would never end. [ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7nD7dbkkBIA]Rockefeller Reveals 9/11 FRAUD to Aaron Russo - YouTube[/ame]

Good thing this is America and that could never happen here, well the Germans said the same thing under Hitler, cuz that was "Germany"

Because it pretty much spells out that you GIVE UP YOUR CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS if you CHOOSE to fly.
If you don't want to be searched, then drive. But YOUR rights don't extend to minimizing EVERYONE ELSE'S safety.

While the new TSA enhanced pat downs may violate the Fourth Amendment on the surface, what most people are not aware of is that the 9th Circuit Court of the United States ruled on the search of passengers in airports back in 1973, which effectively suspends limited aspects of the Fourth Amendment while undergoing airport security screening.

In 1973 the 9th Circuit Court rules on U.S. vs Davis, 482 F.2d 893, 908, there are key pieces of wording that give the TSA its power to search essentially any way they choose to. The key wording in this ruling includes &#8220;noting that airport screenings are considered to be administrative searches because they are conducted as part of a general regulatory scheme, where the essential administrative purpose is to prevent the carrying of weapons or explosives aboard aircraft.&#8221;

U.S. vs Davis goes onto to state &#8220;[an administrative search is allowed if] no more intrusive or intensive than necessary, in light of current technology, to detect weapons or explosives, confined in good faith to that purpose, and passengers may avoid the search by electing not to fly.&#8221;

Because it pretty much spells out that you GIVE UP YOUR CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS if you CHOOSE to fly.
If you don't want to be searched, then drive. But YOUR rights don't extend to minimizing EVERYONE ELSE'S safety.

While the new TSA enhanced pat downs may violate the Fourth Amendment on the surface, what most people are not aware of is that the 9th Circuit Court of the United States ruled on the search of passengers in airports back in 1973, which effectively suspends limited aspects of the Fourth Amendment while undergoing airport security screening.

In 1973 the 9th Circuit Court rules on U.S. vs Davis, 482 F.2d 893, 908, there are key pieces of wording that give the TSA its power to search essentially any way they choose to. The key wording in this ruling includes noting that airport screenings are considered to be administrative searches because they are conducted as part of a general regulatory scheme, where the essential administrative purpose is to prevent the carrying of weapons or explosives aboard aircraft.

U.S. vs Davis goes onto to state [an administrative search is allowed if] no more intrusive or intensive than necessary, in light of current technology, to detect weapons or explosives, confined in good faith to that purpose, and passengers may avoid the search by electing not to fly.

Because it pretty much spells out that you GIVE UP YOUR CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS if you CHOOSE to fly.
If you don't want to be searched, then drive. But YOUR rights don't extend to minimizing EVERYONE ELSE'S safety.

While the new TSA enhanced pat downs may violate the Fourth Amendment on the surface, what most people are not aware of is that the 9th Circuit Court of the United States ruled on the search of passengers in airports back in 1973, which effectively suspends limited aspects of the Fourth Amendment while undergoing airport security screening.

In 1973 the 9th Circuit Court rules on U.S. vs Davis, 482 F.2d 893, 908, there are key pieces of wording that give the TSA its power to search essentially any way they choose to. The key wording in this ruling includes noting that airport screenings are considered to be administrative searches because they are conducted as part of a general regulatory scheme, where the essential administrative purpose is to prevent the carrying of weapons or explosives aboard aircraft.

U.S. vs Davis goes onto to state [an administrative search is allowed if] no more intrusive or intensive than necessary, in light of current technology, to detect weapons or explosives, confined in good faith to that purpose, and passengers may avoid the search by electing not to fly.

The constitution is clear that We the People have empowered the government with the necessary power to preserve and protect We the People, and that includes giving up some personal liberty in return for safer air travel.

The constitution is clear that We the People have empowered the government with the necessary power to preserve and protect We the People, and that includes giving up some personal liberty in return for safer air travel.

Click to expand...

Actually, No it doesn't. It guarantees protection from unreasonable search and seizure based without probable cause. There is no probable cause. If the airlines want to do it then fine but the government should stay out of it.

The constitution is clear that We the People have empowered the government with the necessary power to preserve and protect We the People, and that includes giving up some personal liberty in return for safer air travel.

Click to expand...

Actually, No it doesn't. It guarantees protection from unreasonable search and seizure based without probable cause. There is no probable cause. If the airlines want to do it then fine but the government should stay out of it.

Click to expand...

um . . . you are woefully wrong on the principles of SCOTUS's duties and the power of judicial review. invent a time travel machine and go back to 1791 if you want to live that way.

Boy, you people just don't get it. Big Brother needs to take your rights away in order to protect them. Because "911 changed everything." So quit your complaining and get onboard with the Police State!...Or else!

Useful Searches

About USMessageBoard.com

USMessageBoard.com was founded in 2003 with the intent of allowing all voices to be heard. With a wildly diverse community from all sides of the political spectrum, USMessageBoard.com continues to build on that tradition. We welcome everyone despite political and/or religious beliefs, and we continue to encourage the right to free speech.

Come on in and join the discussion. Thank you for stopping by USMessageBoard.com!